BS BHALLA Vs. DDA
LAWS(DLH)-2012-9-448
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided on September 24,2012

BS BHALLA Appellant
VERSUS
DDA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

G.S.SISTANI,J - (1.)RULE .
(2.)AT the request of the counsel for the parties, writ petition is set down for final hearing and disposal.
Necessary facts to be noticed for the disposal of this writ petition are that the petitioner had applied to the DDA under the New Pattern Registration Scheme, 1979 (NPRS-1979) for allotment of an LIG flat at Kondli Gharoli, Delhi vide registration No.13405. Till the year 1989, no allotment was made in favour of the petitioner, at the same time the DDA introduced another scheme titled Awas Sakar Yojna (ASY) 1989. Under this scheme, the registrants of NPRS ­ 1979 could get their registration transferred from a cooperative society and get allotment of a plot of land to build multi - storyed Cooperative Group Housing flats. On account of the long wait, the petitioner was tempted to take the benefit of the ASY scheme. At the request of the petitioner, the registration of the petitioner stood transferred to ASY 1989. Despite the registration of the petitioner having been transferred, the DDA included the name of the petitioner in the draw held under the NPRS 1979 Scheme in the year 1990. The petitioner was successful and he was allotted an LIG flat in Kondli Gharoli, Delhi. Despite this allotment having been made, the demand- cum-allotment letter was not issued to the petitioner. The petitioner also could not get any benefit under the ASY-1989 Scheme upto the year 1991. On 7th October, 1992, the ASY scheme was closed by the DDA and the registration of the persons like the petitioner, stood transferred back to the NPRS, 1979 with an entitlement to get a flat thereunder as per their seniority. DDA even formed a policy later on stipulating that such persons will get the flat at the old cost when their entitlement become due. In the year 1991 itself, i.e. on 03.06.1991 the petitioner made a representation to the DDA that since no allotment was made in his favour under the ASY scheme, therefore, the benefit of the LIG flat allotted under the NPRS 1979 Scheme be handed over to him. No response was received from the DDA to the said representation. Similarly situated persons approached this Court, as the DDA had closed the ASY Scheme on the one hand and on the other hand the applicants were not being granted benefit of their priority under the NPRS 1979 scheme. This issue was finally resolved by a judgment delivered by this Court in the case of Frontier Avas Sakar Cooperative Group Housing Society and Ors. Vs. DDA decided on 1st July, 1996 in which the DDA made a statement that registration of all the persons, who could not get any benefit under the ASY 1989 Scheme would stand transferred back to NPRS 1979 Scheme and they will be entitled to get flats as per their seniority. According to the petition, the petitioner made two more representations to the DDA on 12th June, 2003 and 26th March, 2004, explaining the facts of his case and requesting that a flat be allotted in the same zone and at the same cost of the year 1991. To these representations also no response was received from the DDA. After the judgment of this Hon'ble Court in the case of Frontier Avas Sakar Cooperative Group Housing Society (Supra), the DDA approved the case of the petitioner for allotment in the same area and at the same cost. In March 2006, the name of the petitioner was included in the draw of lots and an LIG flat was allotted to the petitioner in Lok Nayak Puram, at the current cost, instead of Kondli Gharoli, in an illegal, arbitrary and mindless manner.

(3.)THE petitioner on gaining knowledge about the said allotment made a representation to the DDA on 16th April, 2007, as the allotment ­ cum ­ demand letter was not received by the petitioner, pointing out to the DDA that he was entitled to an LIG flat in the East Zone/East Delhi as per the approval given in his case and that too at the cost of the year 1986. No response was received by the petitioner to the said representation as well. On personal visits and queries made by the petitioner in this regard, it was informed by the DDA officials to the petitioner that the matter was being looked into by the DDA and the petitioner should wait for some time for the DDA to take appropriate action in the matter and he would be informed by the DDA in due course of time. After patiently waiting for a period of about two years, the petitioner again made a representation to the DDA on 12th May, 2009, reference was given to the earlier representation dated 16th April, 2007. Another reminder was issued on 9th July, 2009. In the absence of any response from the DDA, the petitioner made an application under the Right to Information Act on 3rd June, 2010, to get information about his case, in response thereto, i.e. on 20.07.2010, the petitioner was informed that the original record of the file was not readily available, and as and when the same become available suitable reply would be sent to the petitioner. Thereafter the petitioner again made representations to the DDA in the matter, on 26.10.2010, 02.02.2011 and 21.4.2011 pointing out that the allotment letter in respect of the flat allotted in Loknayak puram in March 2006 was not received by him and that his case was covered under the policy and he be allotted a flat in Kondli Gharoli.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.